- Jul 7, 2017
- 3,091
- 11,713
Proposal: Rasmus Andersson for Necas
- Thread starter RasmusAndersson
- Start date
Necas for Anderson feels like spinning our tires. Ya, our GF will be better, but we'd be bottom 5 for sure in GA
This trade probably puts us dangerously close to 11th
This trade probably puts us dangerously close to 11th
I think this trade will solidify them as bottom 10 team especially if Markstrom is traded. It’s just a misspend of assets.
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
This thread is WAY better under the conceit that Rasmus Andersson is trying to trade himself
As apposed to now?
Necas fits better into the long term time frame of Calgary's rebuild/tool. Id rather sign him to a long deal now at 25, than having to decide if you want to keep a 29 year old Rasmus in two years from now, bc he'll also want a long term deal.
It breaks my heart to see Rasmus go, but asset management wise it's the better position. Then you sell Mangiapane/Kuzmenko/Sharangovich at the deadline and finish in the bottom 10 again.
Ps. I probably only sell Sharangovich at the TDL if his contract demands are out of wack.
But Rasmus is 28 with 2 years left and Necas is a 25 year old RFA who we can sign long term. That alone is a huge value win for us long term imo, whereas Carolina is in win-now mode and likely can’t afford what Necas wants.
No doubt that this move would result in us filling one hole while creating another, but imo a guy like Necas could do wonders to help develop our young forwards whereas Rasmus likely won’t be around when we’re good again.
KirkAlbuquerque
#WeNeverGetAGoodCoach
Seems like decent value. Andersson is good but not that good , same as Necas
Value is fine. It just doesn’t make sense for the Flames
Some Other Flame
Registered User
- Dec 4, 2010
- 7,597
- 9,221
Value is irrelevant. Flames don't need another winger; they already have too many.
Secondly, it's completely nonsensical. The Flames' defense is already bottom 10, and that's with Andersson. Trade him and it's bottom 5 easily. Whatever offense Necas might provide is easily negated by the goals they'll give up.
If the Flames are gonna trade Andersson, it would have to be for actual futures, not a 25 year old good but not elite player looking for a sizeable pay day.
The Flames will be contenders in 4-5 years, Necas will be 30 by the time, the Flames are ready to compete.
The issue is one plays D, an important position. The other plays wing. An area of abundance for us and the easiest thing to find.
4-5 years if everything goes well. If we draft more Honzek type players we could be talking a Buffalo situation.
All three of Zary, Necas, and Sharangovich have centre potential, so it's not as binary as you're suggesting. Anderson's contract situation is a lot less convenient for the Flames (the reverse is true for CAR).
Harsh on a guy whose D+1 year was marred by injury to catch a stray like that. Maybe a controversial opinion but I think Pelletier will flirt with bust status when he can't establish himself next year. Never been convince by him at the NHL level.
Sharangovich is not a center. We've seen that experiment play out. He was good as a winger, struggled defensively and in the dot at center. Necas is not a center. Same deal as Sharangovich. Zary MIGHT be a center. We don't have enough reps yet to determine that. I think Pospisil could play up the middle potentially too, but we don't know that.
What we do know is we have 7 guys who need top 9 wing spots not counting either of Coronato or Pelletier (I agree with you btw).
On Honzek, I was very critical of the pick when it was made. I said at the time Riley Heidt who was the last pick in the 2nd round was a better player. This isn't just an injury situation. He's just not very good. 3rd line wing upside. There were top pairing defensemen, top 6 centers available, heck 2 went right after our pick. We went with a 3rd line winger.
Man that's a really down view on Honzek. I never loved the pick, still felt like a 1st round prospect to me though. You're bold to be projecting how all those 2023 prospects are going to turn out. Getting off topic though...
Sharangovich didn't play that much centre last year. I'd be interested to have another look, especially if you can put I guy like Necas beside him to drive play.
Beyond that, I'm not so fussed about position bc Im not focused on the short term fit. Necas' age and contract sitauton would allow the Flames to lock down a quality asset for many years, and almost none of them would be post prime. You can't say that about any contract the Flames have on the books right now. Heck, signing Andersson to that contract 4 years ago is the reason why we can trade him for assets now.
Then again, Flame's ownership will probably chase and miss low percentage playoffs chances and then trade Andersson at the 25-26 TDL for something half as valuable as Necas. Losing a 11-15 OA pick to MTL on the way knowing our luck...
I wish it was just bad luck. We've had a combination of poor asset management, delusions of grandeur, below average 1st round drafting AND bad luck.
Honzek IMO was about the 12th or 13th best WHLer available. A guy went at the end of the 2nd round who was pretty clearly a better player. The Flames drafted him because he was big. Most of our mistake picks have been based off the same thing. We don't learn lessons quickly as an organization. It's why we have been either bad or middling for 30 years. One run with a goalie playing out of his mind in a generation and a half.
Scintillating10
Registered User
I am Bettman
Registered User
- May 23, 2022
- 505
- 1,136
How about a three way between BOS/NJD/CAR
Ullmark to Devils for Marino and picks/prospects
Marino and picks/prospects to Hurricanes for Necas
Marino is 27 and cost controlled RHD.
Do not understand this line of reasoning at all. We aren't a competitive team right now. We have maybe one 1st line forward and our D is already bad. We all acknowledge this. So why would we ever focus on positional need over value?
Necas is 25 and looking for a bigger role and a long-term extension. Rasmus is 28 in his prime right now with two years left. As a retooling team, why would we not go for the younger player with similar value? If the situation was reversed and we had the opportunity to move an older forward for a younger dman, we should do that as well. It should be all about value, not about position at this stage.
And then I don’t understand the “if we actually trade Andersson it should be for actual futures” argument either. We should trade him for the most value, period. Why would you prefer a 1st in the 12-17 range and a 2nd over a proven top-6 forward at age 25 looking for a bigger role? The package of actual futures is way riskier than the proven commodity. And if we still aren’t competitive when Necas is 28-29, we can easily move him for that package.
Bottom line is, why would we focus on position or “actual futures” when we’re a retooling team. Our sole focus should be maximizing the value of our assets. If there was a package of futures on the table for Rasmus that was clearly better value than Necas, we should do that. But I don’t see any such package unless a top-5 pick is on the table. Short of that, this is along the lines of the maximum return we could get for Andersson imo. So I’d take it and address the D later with our plethora of picks and D prospects and cap space that we’ve already accumulated.
Cardiac Jerks
Asinine & immoral
As others have mentioned, Necas' speed and ability in transition could make him a C, but even if not, I think you have to consider value over position. If there is a C of similar value and age to Necas that is available, then fine, pursue that first. But I don't see any of those available. So then why just hold onto an aging Rasmus with two years left rather than trading him for a younger player with more value than a mid-first and second? Even midway through next season, when Rasmus has 1.5 years left, his market value will decline considerably with other teams understanding that his next contract will require a big raise and will likely go until he's 35+.
Not saying sell Rasmus because he is one of our core guys who has been around a long time, but for a guy with upside like Necas, I don't see how you say no to that value unless there is clearly better value out there.
I am Bettman
Registered User
- May 23, 2022
- 505
- 1,136
It comes down to what we have. This matters, you have to build a roster. We have 2 top 3 defensemen right now. Trading Ras leaves us with one. We have 7 top 9 wingers for 6 spots not counting Coronato and Pelletier. I don't think you've watched Necas closely if you think he could be a center. He's not a center in any regard. We'd be better off playing Coleman there. We're also talking a 2 year age spread here, not a 10 year gap. Rasmus is the more valuable asset considering contract status and position.
If we trade Rasmus (I'm not opposed to that) it should be for futures at C or D and draft capital. Let's not get it twisted. We are at least 3 core pieces away from being competitive plus their development time. A 2 year re-tool is a pipe dream. We have Wolf who could be a core piece. That's it. Nothing else. Maybe we get one this draft. 2 maybes. Not a single sure thing core piece in our organization. We aren't a Necas (top 6 winger) away from being competitive.
Some Other Flame
Registered User
- Dec 4, 2010
- 7,597
- 9,221
So if the Flames aren't competitive, why exactly would they make deals that are just spinning the wheels? How does decimating the defence for a winger the Flames don't need and throwing Wolf to the wolves help in anyway?
Andersson for Necas neither makes the Flames better or adds more value. I know there's that constant 'what have you done for me lately" mentality that plagues fans endlessly and it's probably pointless to argue with but in reality, Andersson's a RH top pairing defenceman signed for another 2 years at a bargain cap hit. Bad season or not, that's worth considerably more than a top six, or even top line RFA winger.
It's plain silly to say it's a choice between trading Andersson for a mid to low first or Necas. That's not maximizing value in the slightest - it's just more of the Flames' usual thickheadedness in constantly adding unneeded wingers when the need is defence and center. If you can't get actual good value for Andersson, i.e., a top ten pick, then you don't trade him. No matter how shiny the new piece of grass is that caught your eye.
The Flames already have waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many NHL calibre wingers
Huberdeau
Kuzmenko
Sharangovich
Pospisil/Zary
Coleman
Mangiapane
Coronato
Pelletier
Duehr
Hunt
Greer
Klapka
That's 12 bodies for 8 spots. It's at a point where barring trades, you're already forced to play one or both of Coronato and Pelletier on the 4th line just to get them into the NHL lineup. And you really think the best way to maximize value is to trade one of the Flames' most valuable assets for yet another winger?
